Cut off her hand...

[Scrobulous]

Kinda shocked by this post!
Ya know who "killed" Jesus? YOU Did!! And I did!. And every sinner that ever lives. Nobody took Jesus' life. He gave it freely for all of us. These posts are starting to take on an anti-semetic feel.

Not from me! But trofimus may know more than I do on this. It is possible that later jewish scribes or rabbis sought to weed out the messianic prophecies as a response to christianity and to justify their unbelief. I don’t know much about the history of the texts. I will see what Justin Martyr says.

 

[trofimus]

Kinda shocked by this post!
Ya know who "killed" Jesus? YOU Did!! And I did!. And every sinner that ever lives. Nobody took Jesus' life. He gave it freely for all of us. These posts are starting to take on an anti-semetic feel.

You are mixing two various things - the purpose of Christ's death and how it happened. People are guilty of their evil deeds even though God uses it for His plan.

History is not antisemitism. You are really trusting the same people who shouted "crucify him!" that they preserved the word of God without any antichristian bias. I see it to be schizophrenic, a bit.

 

[trofimus]

I will see what Justin Martyr says.

This is a good position. Not judging before studying the topic.

 

[PennEd]

You are mixing two various things - the purpose of Christ's death and how it happened. People are guilty of their evil deeds even though God uses it for His plan.

History is not antisemitism. You are really trusting the same people who shouted "crucify him!" that they preserved the word of God without any antichristian bias. I see it to be schizophrenic, a bit.

I don't understand what you are talking about.

First off, if you want to get technical about exactly who killed Jesus in the literal sense, They were 100% GENTILES! From Gentile Pilate who okayed the death, to the Gentile soldiers that hammered in the nails, to the Gentile who thrust a spear in His side. Sure the Jews brought the charges, but they were powerless to execute Him.

But again, it's silly to lay the blame on ANY individual or group. Jesus was crucified and died for all of us.

You do realize that EVERY "Christian" in the immediate, early Church was Jewish don't you? And that Jesus was, is, and will ever be Jewish? WE, have been grafted into HIM. In essence making US Jewish.

Am I understanding you to say that because the Jewish leadership of the day, that brought charges against Jesus, and persecuted the early JEW comprised Church, hated them so much, that they changed their Scriptures and therefore we can't trust the Bible we now have?

This whole line of thought is EXACTLY what allowed the Church to be so silent during the Holocaust, Inquisition, and many other anti-semetic mass murders and pogroms.

Christ killing Jews. A disgusting charge indeed!

 

[Jimbone]

What I am afraid of when people trying to figure out which verses are inspired and which are not(like we have ‘spidey sense’) the Bible bends to us and not vice versa.

It’s a self-defeating stance. Give a new convert a bible and tell them it’s not entirely inspired and you’ve put doubt in their minds they can fully trust it.

I agree to an existent, but believe that any truly reborn man God leads to all truth, no matter what like He says He will, and His purpose can not be thwarted, none can be snatched out of His hand. This is how I have found I look at it more and more anyway, I trust God to lead all His children to truth. I know how He has worked in, and continues to work in me, and I know I don't believe or think at all like I did the week I was reborn, or the month, or year after. Anyone In Jesus knows this is a process, He works in us and we grow in Him. I have grown to trust His word as I do, I guess in a sense you have to trust His word from the jump because you now KNOW God is real and Jesus is His Son, but I didn't even know what full "trust in His word" even meant at first, heck I'm sure I've only learned a drop of the ocean of Gods glorious truth in the 5 years since He saved a wretch like me, but the work He has done and continues to do in me is really undeniable, even from the outside looking at it, of course this is no boast about myself, but the truth of what God does in those who are reconciled to Him. He completely changes us and uses us for His glory, as a testament of His power and goodness. That is why I hate when we get too divisive over things that are really Gods to do in each of us. If we come together more, even though we may disagree, that does not mean that we are not meant to share our perspectives, maybe you were the one meant to, in love, share the things God needs them to know, and you know what? They may even be the one He sends to you to open your eyes to unrevealed truth.

Because of Jesus giving my spirit life and reconciling it to His Holy Spirit, I can now grow in Him, I grow in THE "Truth", and truth has become most precious to me now, because Jesus is truth. Jesus Christ is truth and most precious to His world, and He changes us then sends us to declare this truth to those who are still blind, for outside of His truth all is lost and He loves us all, and He tells us the most important thing is to love each other. So I really agree with you as far as what we should tell them, I mean that is the truth, I really just wanted to add my thoughts to that really. Anyway I hope you all have a great day in Jesus glorious name.

 

[PS]

In Deuteronomy 25 we have the following:
11 If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, 12 you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity.

When reading the OT law, it is important to realise that although, by our standards, the events are pretty barbaric, we are dealing with divine judgment and being educated to understand the deadliness of sin and God’s attitude towards it. Genocide is a last resort and the means by which God judges the nations of the middle east. There are indications, Gen 15:16 that God waits generations before judging in this way. We are, in fact, instructed to love the law and to dwell on it night and day Ps 1:2.
It seems to me that the law is an imperfect means of structuring a society along godly lines, but in spite of all this, the above command strikes me as utterly disgusting.
I am appalled too, at commands to stone animals, like bulls who gore people to death. Stoning is a means of killing so painful, slow and disgusting, that surely no merciful God could condone it. Why the cruelty?
I have to say such things really upset my faith.
Does anyone have a view on this?

The contrast between the god of the Jews and the love and mercy of Jesus, whose is God with us is quite remarkable.

Jesus gives the reason for this discrepancy in John 8:44.

 

[LPT]

Well, I am one of those old fashioned guys who when they read ‘you shall cut off her hand, show her no mercy’ draw the conclusion that cutting off a hand is what the verse means. If I don’t assume this, I cannot read the bible at all. It could mean anything. So, I am sticking with the principle that I read the bible like any other text and I take what it says seriously.

That's the point I'm making, you read it as with a English language mind and not how the original language intended it to be and that was about a Levirate marriage.

 

[Embankment]

A simplified version of the Bible-Before the cross God countered our violence with violence. After the cross Jesus is the example of piece we in our new spirit are to emulate.

 

[Scrobulous]

I don't understand what you are talking about.

First off, if you want to get technical about exactly who killed Jesus in the literal sense, They were 100% GENTILES! From Gentile Pilate who okayed the death, to the Gentile soldiers that hammered in the nails, to the Gentile who thrust a spear in His side. Sure the Jews brought the charges, but they were powerless to execute Him.

But again, it's silly to lay the blame on ANY individual or group. Jesus was crucified and died for all of us.

You do realize that EVERY "Christian" in the immediate, early Church was Jewish don't you? And that Jesus was, is, and will ever be Jewish? WE, have been grafted into HIM. In essence making US Jewish.

Am I understanding you to say that because the Jewish leadership of the day, that brought charges against Jesus, and persecuted the early JEW comprised Church, hated them so much, that they changed their Scriptures and therefore we can't trust the Bible we now have?

This whole line of thought is EXACTLY what allowed the Church to be so silent during the Holocaust, Inquisition, and many other anti-semetic mass murders and pogroms.

Christ killing Jews. A disgusting charge indeed!

It is very easy when countering one extreme position to go too far in the opposite direction. It often helps to define our terms. What is a jew? A jew is a person who lives under the old covenant. Certainly jesus and all our heros from the NT were born as jews, but they did not remain as jews. Jesus brought a new covenant and after this time a jew is one who rejects the messiah and the new covenant and is therefore damned.
To characterise jesus as a jew shows a woeful lack of understanding. Jesus is God. God doesn’t have a religion! God has replaced judaism. Being grafted into Christ, does NOT make us jews! All the original believers who put their faith in christ rejected judaism and became christians and to miss this point shows a complete lack of understanding of the gospel.
The jews, not the romans, were responsible for the death of jesus and his blood is on their heads Mt 27:25. The Roman governor wanted to release Jesus and would have done so. The jews didn’t let him.
The jews are defined by their rejection of christ and they maintain this hatred of christ to the present day. The jew has no special status now. He is numbered among the transgressors.
There is, of course, a but. But as you say, we all killed christ. The fact that the jews were the active instrument and the romans the passive instrument, in the murder of christ, is not the point. The whole human race is against God and only by his grace are any saved - and that through Christ.
It is not our place to persecute the jews or to blame them. The jews were a blessing and will be again. The correct attitude of the christian should be the same as Paul’s. To grieve for them. They are lost and they still have a place in God’s heart. If God has not abandoned them, nor can we.
But there is a trend in christianity today to glorify the modern state of israel for some batty eschatological reasons and imagine that judaism has some legitimacy. It doesn’t. Spiritually it is no different from islam.

 

[Embankment]

It is very easy when countering one extreme position to go too far in the opposite direction. It often helps to define our terms. What is a jew? A jew is a person who lives under the old covenant. Certainly jesus and all our heros from the NT were born as jews, but they did not remain as jews. Jesus brought a new covenant and after this time a jew is one who rejects the messiah and the new covenant and is therefore damned.
To characterise jesus as a jew shows a woeful lack of understanding. Jesus is God. God doesn’t have a religion! God has replaced judaism. Being grafted into Christ, does NOT make us jews! All the original believers who put their faith in christ rejected judaism and became christians and to miss this point shows a complete lack of understanding of the gospel.
The jews, not the romans, were responsible for the death of jesus and his blood is on their heads Mt 27:25. The Roman governor wanted to release Jesus and would have done so. The jews didn’t let him.
The jews are defined by their rejection of christ and they maintain this hatred of christ to the present day. The jew has no special status now. He is numbered among the transgressors.
There is, of course, a but. But as you say, we all killed christ. The fact that the jews were the active instrument and the romans the passive instrument, in the murder of christ, is not the point. The whole human race is against God and only by his grace are any saved - and that through Christ.
It is not our place to persecute the jews or to blame them. The jews were a blessing and will be again. The correct attitude of the christian should be the same as Paul’s. To grieve for them. They are lost and they still have a place in God’s heart. If God has not abandoned them, nor can we.
But there is a trend in christianity today to glorify the modern state of israel for some batty eschatological reasons and imagine that judaism has some legitimacy. It doesn’t. Spiritually it is no different from islam.

Very well said!

 

[GraceAndTruth]

I believe the "apparent" cruelty of God in these matters, as well the Flood, and the Multiple decrees to slaughter EVERY man, woman, child, and infant, and in some cases animals, of certain people groups, makes no sense, and can actually trip up Christians, UNLESS we view them in light of Genesis 6.

In Genesis 6 we see fallen angels mating with human women creating a hybrid race of people. In extra-Biblical texts, that ARE mentioned in the Bible, we see that animals ALSO were "mixed" creating unnatural hybrid animals.

The DNA of these abominations continued in some of these people groups. Thus God ensured that this particular sin, carried forth by DNA, was not mixed with the people that would bring forth the Messiah.

God took incredible seriousness ANY attempt to either destroy, like in the case of the woman grabbing the man's genitals, or CORRUPT the seed by which His Son would come.

Genesis 6 sons of God are human children of God, a term used several times in the bible referring to those chosen particularly by God, daughters of men signify otherwise. That verse is not about angels "spirit beings" mating with human women.

Genesis 6, the Nephlim were not men from outer space nor were they "giants" as in Jack and the Beanstalk. Nephlim means tyrant, brutes, in other words a bad old larger than life dictator. You want giants you have to go to the word Raphaim

 

[Scrobulous]

That's the point I'm making, you read it as with a English language mind and not how the original language intended it to be and that was about a Levirate marriage.

So, please explain how cutting off a woman’s hand for defending her husband and stopping a fight has anything to do with a Levirate marriage.
And I have heard all the arguments that by grabbing a man by the genitals, she endangers the messianic line, or can prevent a man having children. It’s all nonsense. If a man gets a football in the groin, he is down for a few minutes and then up and playing again. It isn’t nice but it isn’t the same as ruining his manhood.
The law could easily have said that a woman who destroys a man’s genitals should have her hand cut off and that would at least be consistent with the eye for eye concept. But merely grasping the genitals is a different matter entirely.
I think the severity of the punishment is connected with the idea of a strange woman touching another man’s genitals, or having power over a man by taking advantage of his weakness. So, this scripture is rooted in male paranoia and was tolerated by God in the same way as divorce.
I know this doesn’t sit well with all those who think that the law is a perfect expression of God’s will and scripture is perfect and sacred. I take the view that scripture was a joint venture between man and God. The spirit is certainly the senior partner, but a man was involved. He is not an automatic typewriter. But he is not free to write any idea that pops into his head. The scripture is God and man working together. The man’s character, education and experience all contribute to the flavour of the final work. God accepts this limitation and is able to get his message across despite it. God made concessions. There are aspects of the law that are merely stop gap measures until the perfect will of God was expressed in Christ. These two verses in Deuteronomy, are for me, an example of this.

 

[Quantrill]

So, please explain how cutting off a woman’s hand for defending her husband and stopping a fight has anything to do with a Levirate marriage.
And I have heard all the arguments that by grabbing a man by the genitals, she endangers the messianic line, or can prevent a man having children. It’s all nonsense. If a man gets a football in the groin, he is down for a few minutes and then up and playing again. It isn’t nice but it isn’t the same as ruining his manhood.
The law could easily have said that a woman who destroys a man’s genitals should have her hand cut off and that would at least be consistent with the eye for eye concept. But merely grasping the genitals is a different matter entirely.
I think the severity of the punishment is connected with the idea of a strange woman touching another man’s genitals, or having power over a man by taking advantage of his weakness. So, this scripture is rooted in male paranoia and was tolerated by God in the same way as divorce.
I know this doesn’t sit well with all those who think that the law is a perfect expression of God’s will and scripture is perfect and sacred. I take the view that scripture was a joint venture between man and God. The spirit is certainly the senior partner, but a man was involved. He is not an automatic typewriter. But he is not free to write any idea that pops into his head. The scripture is God and man working together. The man’s character, education and experience all contribute to the flavour of the final work. God accepts this limitation and is able to get his message across despite it. God made concessions. There are aspects of the law that are merely stop gap measures until the perfect will of God was expressed in Christ. These two verses in Deuteronomy, are for me, an example of this.

No, this Scripture is from God. Your idea of 'joint venture' of Scripture is a lie. By joint venture you remove the inspiration of Scripture. The Scripture is God working, and man the instrument. At times those who were the instruments didn't understand what they were writing at the time. (1 Peter 1:10-11)

You want to pick and choose what you believe are Scripture from God and what is not. Thus all you are doing is writing your own bible. As will anyone else who follows your belief.

Quantrill

 

[Scrobulous]

No, this Scripture is from God. Your idea of 'joint venture' of Scripture is a lie. By joint venture you remove the inspiration of Scripture. The Scripture is God working, and man the instrument. At times those who were the instruments didn't understand what they were writing at the time. (1 Peter 1:10-11)

You want to pick and choose what you believe are Scripture from God and what is not. Thus all you are doing is writing your own bible. As will anyone else who follows your belief.

Quantrill

I said the scripture is from God. The joint venture is a fact, not an opinion. You will also see that I acknowledge the inspiration of the holy spirit in the process. You seem to have an islamic view of the bible, that God in some way bypassed men altogether. Why did Jesus, then, not write an autobiography?
God is perfect, man is not, even under the inspiration of the spirit. But it doesn’t matter. God is big enough and smart enough to work around it all. I am not saying the bible is unreliable, but in my opinion there are human influences in parts of it. There are no doctrinal errors, there are no mistakes. There are bits that do not reflect the perfect will of God and Jesus himself makes this very point.
There is no picking and choosing. I don’t read the bible selectively. I read it with absolute faith that this is the word of God. But if I find a few verses that seem to indicate that the law is cruel and brutal, I don’t assume that God is cruel and brutal. God’s wrath is fully understandable in terms of his love and holiness. God’s judgment on sin is also fully consistent with God being loving and compassionate. So I am not rejecting core biblical teaching to accomodate modern sensitivities.
I don’t pick and choose what I will believe and what I will reject. But, I do think and try to understand and this means not accepting dogmatic and inflexible positions.
I am fully convinced that Jesus would have no part in cutting off a woman’s hand for grasping a man’s genitals and I don’t believe he would subject an innocent animal to stoning. These are peripheral issues, theologically and they should remain so.

 

[Scrobulous]

The contrast between the god of the Jews and the love and mercy of Jesus, whose is God with us is quite remarkable.

Jesus gives the reason for this discrepancy in John 8:44.

You are making a grave mistake in associating the God of the jews with the devil. We are discussing differences between the old and new covenants, but both were mediated by the same God. Obviously the old covenant was not ideal. It accomodates man’s weakness and in it, God compromises his holy standard. The old covenant is harsh and brutal, but was necessary given the circumstances at the time. God had to show man that he could not even live up to the restricted standard set out in the law and that God’s plan of redemption in Christ was the only plan that could save man and unite him with God.
The jews are currently excluded from the blessing of God. This time will end and the jews will return, thereby fulfilling God’s plan to save all nations.
It is easy to trip up over the jews. Christians must steer a careful course between extreme positions.

 

[Quantrill]

I said the scripture is from God. The joint venture is a fact, not an opinion. You will also see that I acknowledge the inspiration of the holy spirit in the process. You seem to have an islamic view of the bible, that God in some way bypassed men altogether. Why did Jesus, then, not write an autobiography?
God is perfect, man is not, even under the inspiration of the spirit. But it doesn’t matter. God is big enough and smart enough to work around it all. I am not saying the bible is unreliable, but in my opinion there are human influences in parts of it. There are no doctrinal errors, there are no mistakes. There are bits that do not reflect the perfect will of God and Jesus himself makes this very point.
There is no picking and choosing. I don’t read the bible selectively. I read it with absolute faith that this is the word of God. But if I find a few verses that seem to indicate that the law is cruel and brutal, I don’t assume that God is cruel and brutal. God’s wrath is fully understandable in terms of his love and holiness. God’s judgment on sin is also fully consistent with God being loving and compassionate. So I am not rejecting core biblical teaching to accomodate modern sensitivities.
I don’t pick and choose what I will believe and what I will reject. But, I do think and try to understand and this means not accepting dogmatic and inflexible positions.
I am fully convinced that Jesus would have no part in cutting off a woman’s hand for grasping a man’s genitals and I don’t believe he would subject an innocent animal to stoning. These are peripheral issues, theologically and they should remain so.

No, not your definition of the 'joint venture'. That is your false opinion. I have a Christian view of the Bible that God used man as the instrument but what was written was the Word of God not the word of man. This does not remove man's part. It insures what is written is from God and not man.

You're saying not all parts of the Bible are from God. You're saying not all parts of the Bible are inspired by God. You're saying certain things go against your understanding and so must not be from God. Yes, you do pick and choose. You have stated that you reject certain Scripture as being from God. You can't have it both ways.

Concerning Jesus you are wrong. He would support the Law. This same Jesus allowed Himself to be brutalized and die a torturous death to remove the claims the law had against us. Why would He do that?

Quantrill

 

[PS]

You are making a grave mistake in associating the God of the jews with the devil. We are discussing differences between the old and new covenants, but both were mediated by the same God. Obviously the old covenant was not ideal. It accomodates man’s weakness and in it, God compromises his holy standard. The old covenant is harsh and brutal, but was necessary given the circumstances at the time. God had to show man that he could not even live up to the restricted standard set out in the law and that God’s plan of redemption in Christ was the only plan that could save man and unite him with God.
The jews are currently excluded from the blessing of God. This time will end and the jews will return, thereby fulfilling God’s plan to save all nations.
It is easy to trip up over the jews. Christians must steer a careful course between extreme positions.

Go to the bottom of the first paragraph on this page and you will see three rows of names for the different deities the people worshipped.

http://jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/8083-images

 

[PennEd]

Genesis 6 sons of God are human children of God, a term used several times in the bible referring to those chosen particularly by God, daughters of men signify otherwise. That verse is not about angels "spirit beings" mating with human women.

Genesis 6, the Nephlim were not men from outer space nor were they "giants" as in Jack and the Beanstalk. Nephlim means tyrant, brutes, in other words a bad old larger than life dictator. You want giants you have to go to the word Raphaim

I fully understand that is what has been taught in most Churches for a very long time. It's just wrong, for a lot of reasons.

People have in their minds what Angels are, and it is very difficult to get them to see the truth.
That fallen angels DID mate with human women.

The idea that the sons of Seth mating with the supposedly hotter daughters of Cain, (somehow the daughters of Seth were ugly) creating an unnatural hybrid race is patently absurd. "Spirit beings" don't eat. The men of Sodom wanted to have sex witha "Spirit being? Upon His resurrection was Jesus a Spirit being, or did He eat, and tell Thomas to feel His wounds?

The exact term used in Genesis 6 bene elohim, is used only three other times. All are in Job, All are clearly Angels.
Job 1:6
6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and †Satan came also †among them.

Job 2:1
2 Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the Lord.

Job 38:7
7 When the morning stars sang together,
And all the sons of God shouted for joy?

Jude
6 And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day; 7 as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the [vengeance of eternal fire.

Here Jude tells us that these angels that sinned are currently being held in chains, until final judgement, AND he tells WHAT the sin was, as he relates it to the Sin of Sodom and Gomorrah in going after strange flesh.

The Rephaim are descendants of the Nephelim. The Nephelim being distinguished as 1st generation angel/human offspring.

The Bible IS replete with giants. I can show you at least half a dozen places where they are encountered in Scripture if you like.

 

[Scrobulous]

Go to the bottom of the first paragraph on this page and you will see three rows of names for the different deities the people worshipped.

http://jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/8083-images

I see where you are coming from, but it is not usual to characterise a people by what the worst elements in their society do. Although we have murderers in the uk, we do not say the british are murderers. It cannot be denied there were times when pretty well the whole country served foreign gods and God brought terrible judgments on them for this, but it is more usual, when speaking of a nation to characterise them by what they aspire to do and be. Israel tried to serve God. They failed, but so would anyone else. They served idols, but so did everyone else. But there was always a faithful remnant, so never did all Israel abandon God. Perhaps if that did happen, history would be different.

 

[PS]

I see where you are coming from, but it is not usual to characterise a people by what the worst elements in their society do. Although we have murderers in the uk, we do not say the british are murderers. It cannot be denied there were times when pretty well the whole country served foreign gods and God brought terrible judgments on them for this, but it is more usual, when speaking of a nation to characterise them by what they aspire to do and be. Israel tried to serve God. They failed, but so would anyone else. They served idols, but so did everyone else. But there was always a faithful remnant, so never did all Israel abandon God. Perhaps if that did happen, history would be different.

Just as an aside, because I don't want this to escalate into a major discussion, Moses made graven images in the form of a cherubim and seraphim despite being commanded not to. Further to that, an image of a snake was placed in the Temple. This developed into a cult of snake worship. They called their gods LORD, see the Golden Calf. God was there protecting and keeping them, but for the majority He may as well not have been. They even cut Isaiah in half with a saw, godless people that they were. They killed the disciples after they had crucified Jesus and that same mindset is as strong today as it was then among the cults. Please don't talk to me about Judaism, this is a Christian forum and Jesus said no man can serve two masters.